3618 réponses à ce sujet

[Shimmer_Gloom]

"Cerberus deliberately set the thresher maws on the (more than 50) marines, to study the creatures and see how the unit reacted." You know, the one Shepard was the 'sole survivor' of.

That's not terrorism, I agree. But it's certainly morally dubious. If Cerberus aren't terrorists can we at least agree they are 'morally dubious?'

[Shimmer_Gloom]

HomelessGal wrote...

Its worth pointing out that the ME2 Codex also tries to write Sovereign off as a Geth ship.

Why, to show that the Codex is writen from an Aliance perspective?  Yeah, I'm cool with that.  I get that the codex is biased.  But does that mean we need to drink 'Cerberus Brande Cool-aid?'

[SandTrout]

Shimmer_Gloom wrote...

The bolded part, yes.  But the part where I was trying to impress upon Lotion the failing of 'absolute truth' and 'true objectivity' was serious.

There isn't (likely) ANY absolute truth.  Certianly not in a video game.

And that's fine.  We don't have to strive for absolute truth in life.  Real life is dirty and complicated and shiny absolutes are hard to find.

Lets all play in the muck, shall we?

Truth is most certainly not subject to your whims. It exists, even if our understanding of it is limited. Truth in and of itself has no qualifiers like 'good' or 'evil', those terms are artifical (human made) concepts that are subjective in meaning because they have no absolute value until you provide qualifiers that tie them to facts relevant to a stituation/person. If those facts are true, then they represent truth, but the good/evil judgment is still subject to the definition that is constructed by the onlookers for the non-real concepts of good and evil.

If there is an apparent contradiction, then it means that there is a failure to understand reality, not a failure in reality. By its very definition reality cannot contradict itself, even if the concepts that people create in order to understand reality can contradict themselves.

The argument that "Reality is subjective" is a lie used to cover the fact that you do not wish to deal with the real.

"Cerberus is a human-survivalist paramilitary group. Their core belief
is that humans deserve a greater role in the galactic community. Any
methods of advancing humanity's ascension are justified, including
illegal or dangerous experimentation, terrorist activities, sabotage and
assassination"

The Codex mentions, in very vague and undefined terms, unspecified 'terrorist activities' that Cerberus has supposedly pre-justified by Cerberus's beleifs. It makes no mention of any actual terrorist act that Cerberus has actually participated in.

Modifié par SandTrout, 03 août 2011 - 03:02 .

[Shimmer_Gloom]

Saphra Deden wrote...

Shimmer_Gloom wrote...

"Cerberus deliberately set the thresher maws on the (more than 50) marines, to study the creatures and see how the unit reacted." You know, the one Shepard was the 'sole survivor' of.

That's not terrorism, I agree. But it's certainly morally dubious. If Cerberus aren't terrorists can we at least agree they are 'morally dubious?'

No, I have no problem with what they do.  I will concede that it is morally dubious to most people but I'm not most people.

Okay... well.  Then I guess we can't have a civil debate then.  If your brand of morality encompases watching fifty people get torn apart by giant worm-things just to see what kind of pretty patterns their entrails make...

Then we should probably just agree we have vast differences in world veiws and call it a night.

[Sisterofshane]

Saphra Deden wrote...

Shimmer_Gloom wrote...

But what then about the IRA (an obvious analogue to Cerberus) or Hezbollah or any other group that strives to be 'legitimate' but commits extraleagal and violent actions and happen to be non-state entities.

They aren't terrorists unless they're targetting civilians in an effort to try and scare them into pressuring their governments to give in to their (IRA, Hezbollah's) demands.

It is still relevant to government agents as well.  It is not strictly limited to non-government entities against their own government.

[Shimmer_Gloom]

SandTrout: "The argument that 'Reality is subjective' is a lie used to cover the fact that you do not wish to deal with the real."

This is a misrepresentation or failure to understand my point. (It happens no big deal.)

My point is that 'apparent reality is subjective.' This is different than 'reality is subjective' because it includes the power perception plays in reality. If we accept that our perception of the world is not perfect than our perception of the truth will never be perfect. I do not contend that there is not absolute truth... just that it is removed from reality. Because our reality is only what we 'see' and we will never be able to see a 'perfect picture.' This is what I meant about the world being 'murky.'

We all have to play in the muck. Anybody who claims to be otherwise is lying to themselves.

[SandTrout]

You wrote, and I am quoting "Reality is subjective my friend." Good effort on the backpedal, though.

We have already established that our judgments of weather or not it is good or bad to keep the CB are subjective to our interpretation of unclear facts. You then claimed that "Reality is subjective my friend." in an apparent effort to claim that any facts claimed as evidence are invalid. If that was not your intent, then so be it, but that was my perception.

Modifié par SandTrout, 03 août 2011 - 03:17 .

[Shimmer_Gloom]

SandTrout wrote...

You wrote, and I am quoting "Reality is subjective my friend." Good effort on the backpedal, though.

We have already established that our judgments of weather or not it is good or bad to keep the CB are subjective to our interpretation of unclear facts. You then claimed that "Reality is subjective my friend." in an apparent effort to claim that any facts claimed as evidence are invalid. If that was not your intent, then so be it, but that was my perception.

This was said in response to a certian poster who kept claiming that they had a absolute, perfect understand of the 'facts.'  I was trying to illustrate that having an absolute perfect understanding of anything is futile and not something one can claim with imputnity.

And I don't characterize myself as 'backpeddling' so much as qualifying.  I took it for granted that when I said 'reality' that others would understand that I meant 'perception of reality...'

But I shouldn't assume that others start with the same philosophical axioms as I. 

[AlanC9]

SandTrout wrote...
The argument that "Reality is subjective" is a lie used to cover the fact that you do not wish to deal with the real.

Is that really the argument? What I've heard more often is that objective truth is essentially irrelevant, because even if it exists we don't have access to it. We've got the tools that scientists and pragmatists have, of course -- we can put together an explanation that fits the evidence we have, and if it works then it's "true." That's all the "truth" you're going to get with those tools.

There are also other tools, of course. Revelation and whatnot. Those tools work too. At least until we die, when someone's gonna be wrong.

Modifié par AlanC9, 03 août 2011 - 03:30 .

[Shimmer_Gloom]

AlanC9 wrote...

SandTrout wrote...
The argument that "Reality is subjective" is a lie used to cover the fact that you do not wish to deal with the real.

Is that really the argument? What I've heard more often is that objective truth is essentially irrelevant, because even if it exists we don't have access to it. We've got the tools that scientists and pragmatists have, of course -- we can put together an explanation that fits the evidence we have, and if it works then it's "true." That's all the "truth" you're going to get with those tools.

There are also other tools, of course. Revelation and whatnot. Those tools work too. At least until we die, when someone's gonna be wrong.

I loled.

But think for a moment... how scary would it be to be told by a God or some such authority absolute truth... heavy....

[Medhia Nox]

@Saphra Deden: I would love to know what type of person you are in real life - I have my suspicions and I'm dying to discover if they're true.

Keep on keeping on - you're a special snowflake and quite entertaining.

[Sisterofshane]

Saphra Deden wrote...

Sisterofshane wrote...

It is still relevant to government agents as well.  It is not strictly limited to non-government entities against their own government.

Government is a legitimate target.

Wasn't arguing that.  I was trying to say that governments themselves can be capable of using terrorism.

[Humanoid_Typhoon]

Shimmer_Gloom wrote...

AlanC9 wrote...

SandTrout wrote...
The argument that "Reality is subjective" is a lie used to cover the fact that you do not wish to deal with the real.

Is that really the argument? What I've heard more often is that objective truth is essentially irrelevant, because even if it exists we don't have access to it. We've got the tools that scientists and pragmatists have, of course -- we can put together an explanation that fits the evidence we have, and if it works then it's "true." That's all the "truth" you're going to get with those tools.

There are also other tools, of course. Revelation and whatnot. Those tools work too. At least until we die, when someone's gonna be wrong.

I loled.

But think for a moment... how scary would it be to be told by a God or some such authority absolute truth... heavy....

Iono...I imagine god would have to have an SQ infinitely greater then our own,would (S)he even be able to put it in a way our feeble minds could comprehend

[Kaiser Shepard]

Saphra Deden wrote...

No, it's not terrorism. Giving them the base is the only reasonable course of action. There is too much at stake to just destroy it.

Stop letting fear guide you.

There's too much at stake to simply give in to some cult of personality.

Stop letting charisma guide you.

Saphra Deden wrote...

The Big Bad Wolf wrote...

Akuze is a perfect example of why Cerberus can be trusted with the base.

/sarcasm

A bunch of meat-heads died for a cause. Cry me a river.

'Twasn't their cause, so their unwilling sacrifice is far from justified.

[Shimmer_Gloom]

Saphra Deden wrote...

The Big Bad Wolf wrote...

Akuze is a perfect example of why Cerberus can be trusted with the base.

/sarcasm

A bunch of meat-heads died for a cause. Cry me a river.

What cuase? 

The situation was literally this:

There is silence from a colony.  Marines investigate.  ALL THE MARINES ARE SLUAGHTERED but for Shepard and a guy named Tubbs.  Cerberus watches all the while to see whats going on.  They put a little check mark next to the words 'Thresher Maws are legit' and they go about planning assassinations on alien sympathizers.

What cause did the marines die for?  To satisfy Cerberus curiosity?  How effing callous is that?  I'd even go for 'Evil.'